Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE marched on the Dáil this afternoon, calling on the government to do more to help homeowners in Donegal and Mayo impacted by defective Mica building blocks.
There is a redress scheme in place, but campaigners have said the level of damage to their homes means it is still too expensive to fix them, even with government grants.
They are calling for the government to amend the scheme to cover 100% of the costs, as many families have to completely demolish and then rebuild their homes.
What is mica and how has it caused so much damage?
Micas are a group of minerals that are found in rock, including rock taken from quarries.
In this case, muscovite mica is contained in the building blocks used to construct the houses in the northeast of the country.
According to the 2017 Mica Action Group and the Report of the Expert Panel on Concrete Blocks, Mica has the ability to absorb and store water and results in a disproportionate amount of water in the blocks.
Estimates suggest that the presence of 1% muscovite mica causes a reduction of the concrete strength by approximately 5% and it has relatively poor bond strength with cement paste.
The report stated that the presence of higher levels of moisture also cause issues during cold winters as the blocks are susceptible to loss of integrity in freeze-thaw conditions.
The presence of this mineral has caused large cracks and fissures to opens up in more than 5,000 homes, the majority of which are in Donegal. Some homeowners have already had to move out of their houses because they have been deemed unsafe to live in due to the structural damage.
What about the regulations around this?
The expert panel, in its report to government in 2017, stated that masonry problems in Donegal and Mayo add to “the legacy of building failures or severe non-compliance concerns following the downturn in economic and construction activity in 2008, which exposed vulnerabilities in the building control system that was in place at that time”.
The 2017 report included clarification from the National Standards Authority that a 1% limit applies to the quantity of mica or other harmful impurities in concrete blocks.
This is covered by a statutory instrument. In a number of the impacted homes in Donegal, the levels in samples taken were significantly higher.
Any company placing construction products on the market has specific legal responsibilities which state they will not put a product on the market unless it has characteristics that satisfy requirements under regulations, such as Ireland’s Building Control Regulations.
The 2017 report stated that during the period under consideration, building control authorities did not have the technical resources in-house to test construction products which may have been non-compliant with the requirements of the Construction Products Directive. All enforcement activity was performed within existing local authority budgets.
The panel in its report recommended that “more meaningful on-site inspections and enforcement by building control personnel is required to ensure that standards are maintained as a necessary check and balance to requirements under the current building control system”.
However it said it did not consider it was reasonable to expect that the building control authorities could have prevented the problem from occurring.
The panel also advocated that market surveillance authorities be sufficiently resourced with dedicated units which would have available expertise in the quarrying sector to provide effective enforcement nationwide.
What has the government done to support impacted homeowners?
After a long campaign by impacted homeowners, the Defective Block Scheme was opened for applications in June 2020.
It has five options ranging from external wall replacement (€49,500) to full demolition and rebuild (€247,500). The scheme allows owners to claim up to 90% of the cost up to those limits.
Cabinet was told recently that 433 people in Donegal have engaged with the scheme so far.
Why are impacted homeowners unhappy with the scheme?
For a start, homeowers are required to pay €5,000 for a mica test in order to apply for the grant scheme. Campaigners have said this is a barrier for families, some of whom are already struggling financially.
They have also argued that the grants will not cover the level of work required on their homes.
They are calling on the government to cover 100% of their costs, as they say €247,500 (10% of which they would have to cover themselves) will not cover the costs associated with demolishing and completely rebuilding a home, which is required in some cases.
Homeowners are protesting in Dublin’s city centre today and a small group have been invited to meet with the Minister for Housing to discuss issues with the redress scheme.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Cowboys ted!!!! Unregulated and unanswerable cowboys.
@Mairtin Antaine O Conaill:
Who? The supplier of the blocks? The builders? The engineer that signed off for the buyer? The insurance company?
@Mairtin Antaine O Conaill: You could talk that into coming down.
@Jim Buckley Barrett: the people who made the blocks. The builders wouldnt know they were using defective blocks. The engineers wouldnt have known either. It was happening long before 2008. How did the sample blocks for inspection pass the testing?
Surely the suppliers of the blocks is liable for this if I supplied a inferior product that caused this I’m liable why aren’t the quarry or the supply company
@Stephen Walshe: because at the time nobody knew of the problem in the quarry so there can be no blame on the builders or quarry owner that is the problem as nobody has done wrong just very very bad luck
Of course these poor people no matter if well off or unemployed should be a hundred percent compensated it’s a no brainer in morsl fairness . Nightmare stuff for them sll and years of stress and god knows what affect on their health mental and physical or matriages . Fair is fair . Limit legal staff involved I would think to limit state costs on this or then it could well end up with more being spent on their fees and courts appearances than it could cost to just pay up and cover the rebuilds as I’m sure all the detail is already collaborated From experts who can just file for payment . The affected people totally deserve total financial retribution . A falling down house and no fault , come on .
@Mary O Dwyer: why should my tax pay for it? These taxes are already being squeezed to cover the massive costs of COVID-19 as well as welfare state entitlements costing billions annually!
Why does the taxpayer have to pay to get private homes fixed?
If my hope well tits up I’d be delighted with 90% redress
@Mark Reilly: the 90% only covers up to €247,000. If your house cost for example €350,000 to rebuild then the homeowner is asked to pay over €100,000 to fix a problem that is not their fault
@James Doherty: it’s also not the taxpayers fault!!!
@Gerard O’Sullivan: but it is the fault of building standards and their testing or inspections
@Jakie McLean: no it’s not. the suppliers have a legal responsibility first to provide a good product and “not put a product on the market unless it has characteristics that satisfy requirements under regulations” . They are legally responsible and they should be covering the costs regardless whether they were insptected or not!
Place a levy on all the quarries in the country and cement manufacturers to finance the mica redress schemes
Why does the taxpayer have to pay to get private homes fixed?
If my hope well belly up I’d be delighted with 90% redress
@Mark Reilly: so you’d be delighted to cover the 30 grand or so? How delighted exactly on a scale of 1 to 10? Considering it was none of your fault and you invested time and money into a house with the structural integrity of a rich tea biscuit?
@Alan Biddulph: If I got a stat of the art new house built by the taxpayer, to the highest standards ….for 30 grand , I’d be real happy.
@Alan Biddulph: as a taxpayer not my fault either!! Why should I pick up some of the tab?
@John McG: I think these people would rather not to have their house demolished or fall on them or their families. I think they would much prefer that vermin -rats and mice- didnt have free access to run in and out as they please. I think they would prefer not to have to move their kids into a caravan or mobile home for the winter. Some of them are studying for college exams or leaving cert and trying to do online learning zooming etc for months in a caravan. They would rather have their home back. Not much joy in getting back what you should have had all along.
Some mansions built in Donegal the next few years I imagine
“In this case, muscovite mica is contained in the building blocks used to construct the houses in the northeast of the country.”
As far as I can tell Donegal and Mayo are in the North WEST !
The builder should be made pay
@Pauline Cahill: why?
Why are the suppliers of the concrete which was/is below specification not held to account? Surely, the standards should be maintained without any inspections. Are the concrete producers well connected politically? I suspect that the concrete producers used cheap shale rather that sand-stone aggregate. Do we even know the names of the companies and the owners?.
When houses in the east of the country were affected by pyrite, the government covered 100% of the costs. The precedent is there so why should that percentage be lower just because it’s outside the capital? No one seems to care about anything unless it affects them personally.
I have blocks that I bought 7 years ago and were used in my foundations. Now, some of the blocks that were left over have started to completely fall apart. Of the foundations that are still visible, the surface of the blocks have started to decay. some of the blocks have gotten to the stage of crumbling away to pieces almost as if there were no cement in them at all. Is this the result of mica I wonder??
@Colm O’Leary: Well, it certainly is the result of using inappropriate material in the manufacture of the concrete blocks. I suspect that cheap shale (blue dobe) was used instead of aggregate.
Of course these poor people no matter if well off or unemployed should be a hundred percent compensated it’s a no brainer in moral fairness . Nightmare stuff for them and years of stress and god knows what affect on their health mental ,physical or marriages even. Fair is fair . Limit legal staff involved I would think to limit state costs on this or then it could well end up with more being spent on their fees and courts appearances than it could cost to just pay up and cover the rebuilds as I’m sure all the detail is already collaborated From experts who can just file their already proven cases for payment . The affected people totally deserve financial state support . A falling down house , mortgages no hope of a resale ..ever.. and no fault of theirs , come on .
When it was a dublin problem no body cared now suprise its yours too
@Tom Duff: I think you should look a bit closer to home like your Local councillors and TD’s who you probably voted for and who probably told you that they were not asleep on the job. Was it their political parties in Dublin. Typical politicians, always passing the buck
The problem is not going to go away, the problem is only getting worse. I agree that the tax payer should not be paying for the rebuild of houses, I also believe the tax payer should not have bailed out multi billion euro profit making banks, but we did. These people need help and they need it fast. We need to look at this as a bailout, only this time we are bailing out people in genuine need. Every person who has any insurance pays a 2%levy, (something to do with Quinn insurance going belly up then magically coming good again.) surely the money from that levy is (resting) in a bank account somewhere, it could help a little. (Lot).
have your say